Y 4.G 74/7:T 41/5 FED-DOCS EMERGING THREATS: ASSESSING PUBLIC SAFETY AND SECURITY MEASURES AT NUCLEAR POWER FACILITIES HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY, RELATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION MARCH 10, 2003 Serial No. 108-43 Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Proce 2003 STANFORD UNIVERSITY COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM DAN BURTON, Indiana TOM DAVIS, Virginia, Chairman CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut RON LEWIS, Kentucky JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania ADAM H. PUTNAM, Florida JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR., Tennessee CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan WILLIAM J. JANKLOW, South Dakota HENRY A. WAXMAN, California JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts DIANE E. WATSON, California STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland LINDA T. SANCHEZ, California C.A. "DUTCH" RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of Columbia JIM COOPER, Tennessee CHRIS BELL, Texas BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont (Independent) CONTENTS Blumenthal, Richard, attorney general, State of Connecticut; John T. Wiltse, director, Office of Emergency Management, State of Connecti- cut; and Richard Bond, first selectman, town of New Canaan Conklin, W. Craig, Technological Services Division, Office of National Preparedness, Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate, De- partment of Homeland Security; and Hubert Miller, NRC Region 1 Administrator, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, accompanied by Law- rence Chandler, Associate General Counsel for Hearings, Enforcement and Administration, Nuclear Regulatory Commission Wells, Jim, Director, Natural Resources and the Environment, U.S. Gen- eral Accounting Office; Michael J. Slobodien, director, emergency pro- grams, Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; William F. Renz, director, nuclear protection services and emergency preparedness, Dominion Re- sources Services, Inc.; Angelina S. Howard, executive vice president, Nuclear Energy Institute; Alex Matthiessen, executive director, Riverkeeper; and David Lochbaum, nuclear safety engineer, Union of Conklin, W. Craig, Technological Services Division, Office of National Preparedness, Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate, De- partment of Homeland Security, prepared statement of Howard, Angelina S., executive vice president, Nuclear Energy Institute, Renz, William F., director, nuclear protection services and emergency preparedness, Dominion Resources Services, Inc., prepared statement EMERGING THREATS: ASSESSING PUBLIC SAFETY AND SECURITY MEASURES AT NUCLEAR POWER FACILITIES MONDAY, MARCH 10, 2003 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY, EMERGING THREATS AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM, Washington, DC. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:05 p.m., in room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Christopher Shays (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Representatives Shays, Turner, Janklow, Kucinich and Tierney. Also present: Representative Kelly. Staff present: Lawrence Halloran, staff director and counsel; J. Vincent Chase, chief investigator; Robert A. Briggs, clerk; Mackenzie Eaglen, fellow; David Rapallo, minority counsel; and Jean Gosa, minority assistant clerk. Mr. SHAYS. This hearing entitled, "Assessing Public Safety and Security Measures at Nuclear Facilities," is called to order. The attacks of September 11, 2001 should have seared this hard truth into our national consciousness: Security is not a state of rest. It is not a static measure. Sanctuary from the terrorists of the 21st century demands a new level of vigilance to protect the public from known and emerging threats. Heightened awareness of new threats and proactive countermeasures are particularly imperative to protect critical infrastructure facilities, fixed assets of enormous importance to national economic and social well-being. Of those, civilian nuclear power plants stand as highly attractive targets of terrorism. Today, we ask if Federal regulators are demanding the physical security and preparedness enhancements needed to protect public health and safety from nuclear terrorism. Recent reports suggest the answer may be no. Although specific to the Indian Point reactor complex in Buchanan, NY, observations by the General Accounting Office [GAO], and to a private security firm point to systemic weaknesses in nuclear incident response planning that have implications for every community within 50 miles of any of the Nation's 64 active reactor sites. A release of radiation caused by terrorists is a unique event, one that requires acknowledgment of the distinct factors and fears that will define the public response to such an incident. Yet the chair (1) |